SEARSPORT, Maine — The Searsport planning board expects to make a determination at Monday night’s regular meeting about whether an out-of-state company’s application to build a $40 million liquid propane gas terminal and storage tank has been completed.
But even that decision may be put on hold, as an attorney for two organizations battling to slow down or halt DCP Midstream’s project sent a letter Saturday to planning board members that argues that the company’s applications remain “incomplete and badly flawed.”
“Stuff seems to move along in starts and stops,” Bruce Probert, the longtime chairman of the Searsport planning board, said this weekend.
DCP Midstream received its permit from the Maine fuel board last month, which the board had been awaiting, Probert said.
The Denver-based fuel company also has received permits for the proposed terminal and 22.7 million gallon propane storage tank from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Coast Guard. It now awaits approval from the town of Searsport. After the planning board accepts the application as complete and receives results from a couple of commissioned studies, officials will schedule several public hearings on the controversial project.
One of the reports that board members are eager to look at is Good Harbor Consulting’s risk assessment of the project — a study that was commissioned in August by the Islesboro Islands Trust. The consulting firm is headed by former White House counterterrorism adviser Richard A. Clarke.
Although neither the planning board nor the town of Searsport was involved in commissioning this report, Probert said officials will look it over.
“Everyone would like to see it,” he said.
Steve Miller of the Islesboro Island Trust said Good Harbor Consulting is “definitely in the middle” of the work right now. Analysts there have visited three other liquid propane gas facilities on the east coast, including Tampa, Fla., in order to evaluate the mechanisms of safe operations and compare them with the DCP Midstream proposal.
“They’ve also met with the Coast Guard and are meeting with others in the region who are the sources of information,” Miller said. “We know they’re actively engaged in the process.”
His nonprofit organization and the Thanks But No Tank opposition group together sent the letter to the planning board members that alleges the application’s incompleteness. He said that there is uncertainty about whether the applicant — named as DCP Searsport, LLC — has demonstrated its financial capacity to meet the town’s performance standards for the project. He said there is a distinct difference between DCP Midstream and DCP Searsport.
“The Searsport planning board is required to make sure the applicant has financial capacity,” Miller said. “There’s no proof that DCP Searsport, LLC, has that financial capacity as currently presented.”
But Roz Elliott of DCP Midstream said Sunday that that’s not the case.
“We’re more than able to show the financial capacity of DCP midstream for this project,” she said.
Elliott said she expects the planning board to finish the completeness of the application Monday, and is looking forward to participating in the public hearings which will be scheduled in regards to the project.
According to Probert, the planning board is looking into holding a week’s worth of public hearings in the Searsport District High School gymnasium in mid-November.
“Once we hear about the public hearing, we’ll certainly make plans to be there and represent why this is a good thing for the town of Searsport, from jobs to taxes to community involvement,” Elliot said.
That point of view is not shared by everyone, including Ken Agabian of Thanks But No Tank. He said his organization is awaiting the results of an appeal filed against the Maine Department of Environmental Protection in Kennebec County Superior Court on the grounds that the agency disregarded effects to the area’s scenic and environmental character when it granted a permit for the terminal project.
Volunteers also are working to do community outreach on safety and aesthetic concerns about the tank project and also to urge surrounding communities to request official standing as Searsport makes a decision.
Communities that have voted to request official standing include Belfast, Camden and Islesboro.
“We’re looking to find ways to slow up the project, using the levers that we have,” he said.
The Searsport planning board will meet at 6:30 p.m. Monday, Oct. 8 at Union Hall in Searsport.
Does anyone remember the balloon test? You could BARELY see the balloons! There’s no scenic degradation for Searsport. All you see in Searsport from the harbor or even Islesboro is tank after tank! One more isn’t going to change everything!
The balloons were not real visible because there is currently 23 acres of woods on the site.
The the whole site from Rt. 1 to the railroad tracks will be cleared.
DCP has offered in the initial hearings that the chain link fence is a buffer. Wow, thanks!
There is a reason no one has shown a clear picture of the site, they know it is going to look like something on the New Jersey Turnpike.
The rest of the Mack Point site is pretty isolated from the rest of town.
This is not needed. Natural Gas will be coming to the coast through the pipeline that goes from Searsport to Loring. The Natural Gas company that bought it has stated this intent.
It will tie into the pipeline in Winterport. That will do a lot more for jobs and growth than the tank will.
So why would we even want to consider expensive LPG. This is too big a project with too little return to the town or the area.
Is this a NIMBY issue? Well, yes. If you live in Searsport you know how much traffic is already here.
All this nonsense for 8-12 jobs? Maybe 100 would be worth considering it, but not 8-12.
I respect your reply. It doesn’t contain the “sky is falling” rhetoric that usually accompanies this story. However, I just ask you to drive Route 1 from Searsport Shores Campground to Just Barb’s. Think about where the tank is going to be and at what locations you’ll be able to see it. 2 or 3 times over the 6 mile stretch? Can you see it from the town pier? Probably not. Can you see it from the Penobscot Marine Museum? Doubt it. Can you see it from beautiful downtown Searsport? Doubt it. Can you see it from the Big stop? Yeah, probably. Big deal. Like a gas station is any better to look at than a tank. If Searsport wasn’t between Belfast and Bar Harbor, Route 1 in Searsport would be a ghost town.
And I appreciate your response. It is rare that civil comments show up here.
The problem is that we will not know the full impact until it is built.
I calculated that 16-17 acres of the 23 will be cleared.
The balance is between the RR tracks and the water. This cannot be cut anyway.
This will be a lot more visible than suggested.
One big issue here is that DCP has not shown us what it will look like from the ground.
They did one video way back in 2010 and that is no where to be seen.
They recently balked that a computer graphic is expensive to provide.
That does not pass the straight face test. Thank God, the head of the planning board,
did not buy that.
I have to disagree with your thoughts about Searsport’s place in the world.
This is a great town. It is saddled with negative thinking that this is only a pass-through town.
Isn’t Camden a pass-through town?
Don’t both towns have good harbors? Some nice old buildings.
A lot of people have invested a lot to bring the town to this point. It is not the slum of Waldo County that it was 30 years ago. It still has a way to go.
I think we can balance industry and tourism. All those who invested in shops and inns
are just supposed to give it all up? For 12 jobs and changing the perception of our town.
I am not sure this is the right thing. I respect people who want more jobs and want this project.
I would be pleased to see many other operations in the area.
But any business in town has to be vetted.
I had to do it. They should too. They have a potential impact that is a lot more than
a small business.
Regardless of their claims, there are safety issues, location issues and I suspect if this was proposed in other towns many of the pro-business at any cost folks would think twice.
We just want and need a fair review of what we might get, not blind fanaticism.
The majority of Mainers live too far out in the country to access LNG lines, you know that! The majority not burning oil use LPG (myself included). LPG is cleaner and more efficient than #2 heating oil, and until we develop the technology and infrastructure for CNG (compressed natural gas) it is the ONLY option for the majority of Mainers. There are currently 15 large tanks on this site, yet you make it sound as if they are tearing down virgin woods to install it. Would it be better on the East side of Sears island? then you would not have to look at it.
Ah, but this project is not proposed for Sears Island.
The trees are not virgin and I would not care if they are all clear cut to make a manufacturing plant that hired a couple hundred people. Or built a 5 story building.
There are 15 tanks there, but do you see them from Rt. 1 or most of the town? No!
That is what makes Mack Point a decent neighbor.
Comprehensive Planning is, at least in part, to minimize the impact on neighbors.
This is not a low impact project and is not worth it for such a small return.
That’s right, “[y]ou could BARELY see the balloons!” That was my reaction, too. I’m glad you noticed that.
Back on test day last June 21, I noticed that at the highest portion of the phantom tank we were supposed to try and visualize I could barely see the weather balloon dancing at the end of its tether in the sky — a BIG commercial weather balloon that was bright cherry red in color and about the size of a respectable garden shed!
Don’t you suppose that must have meant it was awfully high up there? With what to the naked eye appeared to be one small red dot and four yellow ones to define a crude outline for this mega-tank, it takes a little imagination to visualize the true scale and the sheer blinding white mass this represents.
There’s a hell of a difference between the existing tanks at Mack Point, the largest of which is just 48 feet high, and the 14-story behemoth that is planned. Not only that, the existing tanks are clustered in low to the water with limited visibility to most of upper Penobscot Bay. The proposed mega-tank would rise from a base elevation at least 50 feet higher than the tank farm to soar nearly 200 feet above the bay.
Imagine a huge squat cylinder 138 feet high and 202 feet wide. Imagine it in all its gleaming white glory under the sun by day and floodlights by night, visible in Frankfort, Prospect, Castine and down the bay past Islesboro and Northport to the Camden hills. If you care to add a cherry to this disagreeable confection, now imagine a great flare of burning gas erupting above this brilliant display a year-round average of about one hour and 22 minutes a day.
In fact, your “one more” tank really would change everything.
Here’s the “sky is falling” rhetoric we were all dreading… Welcome back to the argument Peter.
I have stated incontrovertible facts — regarding the actual size of the proposed mega-tank relative to what is already at Mack Point, regarding the cooling requirement that it be glaring white, regarding that it be lit by night, regarding the need to flare off excess gas constantly boiling off from the liquefied contents.
How does this amount to the “‘sky-is-falling’ rhetoric” you accuse me of? When it comes to rhetoric, it seems your comment depends entirely on rhetoric, on a smarmy accusation dripping with sarcasm and based on no facts at all. What you say appears intended only to discredit what you don’t want to believe. You call upon your imagined mob of fellow believers to join you in blindly sneering at, not honestly considering, what I’ve written.
Challenge my facts or come up with some of your own that contradict or modify the argument associated with mine. If you can’t do that, you have nothing substantive to say.
Ok, you win. Thanks but no tank.
That’s the spirit! Thanks but no tank.
Forget the jobs, flatty money don’t like this, not a good back-drop for sailboats.
I thought it was “flatty money” that was proposing this?
Okay, I like that, flatty vs flatty, since most summer flatty’s are against this, they do not worry over heating a home here in the winter, just getting their sailboats up and down the coast free from any eyesores, must be such a burden for them.
The point is that the DCP Flatties are going to sell you the most expensive petroleum fuel available.
It is a good fuel, just happens to be the most expensive.
Doesn’t that make some sense as to one reason they want to be here?
As you know, the only reason LPG is more expensive currently is supply side economics. This project will bring more LPG into the area, thus lowering the price (econ 101). Now I still believe that ANY fossil fuel is going nowhere but up in price, hence I heat with wood, but utilize LPG for domestic HW, cooking, & backup heat.
Price is certainly based on supply and demand.
I joined an LPG industry group which has projected LPG growth in Maine and New England (as well as the rest of the country) as being flat for the next ten years. That was as far as they went out.
It has been noteworthy that with all the promises made from DCP, cost decreases or price breaks for anyone has not been made.
I’m sure that Roz Elliot is right that “DCP Midstream” can show they have ample resources to build a tank like this. Unfortunately, “DCP Midstream” isn’t the applicant trying to build this tank. Another company, “DCP Searsport LLC” is the APPLICANT….and DCP Searsport LLC has not filed any proof of their financial capacity to build this facility, operate this facility safely, or pay for any damages if a catastrophic incident happens at this facility.
Believe me, if an explosion happened destroying Searsport and injuring or killing people in and around Searsport, Islesboro, Belfast and Stockton Springs, “DCP Midstream” and Roz Elliot would be the first ones explaining the legal difference between “DCP Midstream” and “DCP Searsport LLC” and DCP Midstream would not pay one thin dime for the damage that this facility caused.
The problem for DCP Searsport LLC — the applicant that filed the application to the Searsport Planning Board — is that although DEP gave them an emissions permit…DEP gave the NRPA and Site permits to DCP Midstream Partners, LP; The Army Corps gave its permit to DCP Midstream Partners, LP; Maine DOT and the Fuel Board gave their permits to DCP Midstream Partners, LP; and DCP Midstream Partners, LP (NOT DCO Searsport LLC) is the one with the contractual right to buy the property where this tank would sit (meanign that DCP Searsport LLC does not have the Title, Right and Interest to file this application and have it heard by the Planning Board).
DCP Searsport LLC is the applicant and this is a situation where there is more to a name than just a name — these are completely different, separate and unique legal entities…
kind of like the difference between Kim Novak and Kim Jong Il…not the same person even though they both have the same 3-letter first name.
Most likely, DCP Searsport LLC is a single-purpose, bankruptcy-remote limited liability company (LLC), managed by DCP Midstream. This is a typical (and smart) structure investors use to shield liability from “upstream entities.” It means that, if something goes wrong with DCP Searsport LLC, the financial liability doesn’t extend to the affiliated company, so, yes, it’s very likely “DCP Midstream would not pay one thin dime for the damage that this facility caused.” But there’s nothing untoward about the structure; it’s commonly used for just this reason in many situations.
Regardless, I do hope the tank is not approved.
I see the BDN is on the side of people from away as usual. Nice of them to add “GIANT TANK” in their bias headline. I’m surprised the “no tanks” committee couldn’t muster more folks for this letter writing effort? Just goes to show how many (local) people in searsport want jobs and developement.
They won’t have to explain anything to anyone – the entire area would be a great big crater with everything and everyone within the area turned to ash including pro & con tankers. Face it we simply do not have the infrastructure in place to handle this type of project.
I see in the headlines that happen nearly everyday some wheres. Lets now forget the extra trucks running over ever body and thing in Searsport, and how about all the tourist avoiding the coast of Maine because of that “GIANT TANK.” There must be something else I forgot that could or might scare people.
Didn’t the people of Searsport already approve this project by nearly two to one vote?
No, they did not. They voted against a moratorium for the tank project that was to last for two months.
Then I stand corrected.
The Searsport Fire Department under Jim Dittmeier and the Searsport EMT crews and their families and friends turned out in force to vote down the moratorium. Because they’re convinced they’re going to get full-time do nothing jobs if the tank goes in, along with shiny new trucks.
What they fail to recognize is if the FD becomes full time and commissioned by the state, most of the current staff will fail to meet the *AHEM* physical fitness and dental standards. And I doubt highly, that dishonorable or discharge under other honorable conditions from the military candidates will be considered to stay on. You know who you are.
……
……
How DARE they think to put something like this on OUR coastline !
Why, we will be able to see it every time we motor up from Boston .
Let them heat with wood .
Those of us who live within one mile of this proposed tank are more worried about the safety than the view. Similar tanks don’t have housing so close to it. I don’t live on the water; can’t see the water from my house.
I hope that the planning board takes into consideration that there will be no “do overs” if they decide to allow this death tank to be built. Once the tank is in place it will be there for all future generations to deal with …. it will not matter if the approval was a mistake or not. The tank WILL BE THERE FOREVER.
That’s right, when our resident town historian, Charlene Ferris, politely asked company representatives at their so-called “informational” meeting last January what would become of the tank once it is no longer needed, she was ignored and company flak and meeting moderator Roz Elliot changed the topic. Since then, the company has completely dodged answering this very important question.
The information provided above by KimIslesboro about the cynical but legal strategy of having different corporate entities represent different aspects of this project explains why Ms. Ferris was so rudely brushed off. DCP, no matter what its legal corporate guise, doesn’t want to ever be held responsible for cleaning up its messes. This is standard operating procedure when large corporations are not only to be regarded as having legal personhood but a personhood that is effectively sociopathic.
Here [http://kensinger.blogspot.com/2012/01/chemical-lane-staten-island.html] are pictures of rusting LNG tanks, some of the largest in the world, that were abandoned nearly 40 years on Staten Island, N.Y., after the owners, Belgium-based Distrigas Corp., went ahead and built them on the assumption they would be fully permitted. The death blow to the project was the explosion in 1973 at another nearby LNG tank that killed 40 workers [http://www.silive.com/specialreports/index.ssf/2011/03/lng_explosion_kills_40_destroy.html].
Hello Peter, thanks for your reply. I read your posts often and know how active you are in trying to enlighten the residents of PB to all the negative aspects of this project. DCP is clearly a very deceptive company. I am as “green” as my “means” allow me to be… Despise “big oil” etc. All that put aside, why is there even a justifiable need for DCP to construct a tank of this size? …. DCP rationalizes that Searsport is an ideal location due to the conveniences of being able to transport this stuff via, rail, roads and water. Yet when the negative impact of increased truck traffic was brought up they downplayed it by stating that the volume of trucks would not be as high as they had originally anticipated. The the concern about tankers in the Bay was addressed and they down that as well … stating that there would be “only” 18 tanker trips per yr. Then when the issue pertaining to the safety of transporting this volatile stuff via rail they continued their deceptive practices by stating that they have not made any plans for rail transport yet! Keep up the good work and keep the faith,ed
Thanks for your comment, ospreyhollow. You ask a very good and important question and, frankly, while I have no clear idea why DCP wants to build this mega-tank at Searsport I do know it’s not for the reasons the company gives as its official answer.
I don’t for a moment believe that this development, now set by DCP to cost $50 million, is for the benefit of Maine. It’s true that company officials and representatives of the administration of former Gov. John Baldacci hatched up a scenario in 2007 in which the state allegedly needed to be protected from a propane shortage. Between them, these parties ballyhooed a false account of a so-called crisis that winter but the facts don’t support it.
No Maine homes ran out of propane despite a sentimentally written New York Times article about rugged Mainers looking after one another as the home fires went out. DCP’s claim that Fisher Engineering in Rockland, the snowplow manufacturers, had to shut down because it ran out of propane is equally false.
What did happen was a perfect storm of unfortunate events including a spell of bitter cold, the unexpected cancellation of one LPG tanker ship trip to the East Coast, a week’s delay of another ship occasioned by bad weather, an LPG pipeline leak in Indiana and a brief Canadian railway strike. In spite of this, 60 percent of the Canadian propane was, in fact, delivered on time and with careful conservation in distributing existing local supplies plus some trucking of additional fuel from New York and Ohio everybody in Maine got through this “crisis” with their homes remaining warm and productivity unrestricted.
The fact is since 2007 the development of new fracking and horizontal bore technology in U.S. shale deposits has created a revolution in domestic petroleum product yield. Last year our nation once again became a net exporter of these products. The previous time this was true was back in 1949.
We currently have a homegrown glut of propane and other liquid gas products. As a nation, we don’t need to import a molecule of the stuff. Short-term corporate profiteering, however, is determined to dictate another outcome. In fact, last September the American Petroleum Institute, the quasi-government agency that represents the industry, issued a specific report on propane in which it gloated over the economic opportunities for export of this domestic product overseas. It declared potential opportunity for “robust” foreign sales but noted that infrastructure to support this direction was deficient in the Northeast. It urged that more infrastructure be built.
My suspicion is this is what the DCP mega-tank is ultimately all about. We already have liquefied propane storage facilities available to supply Maine users just over the border in Newington, N.H., and half a day by truck from Providence, R. I.
Furthermore, the number of propane users in Maine is actually going down sharply — thanks to fracking technology! We also have a glut of domestic natural gas (methane), which is significantly cheaper than propane and even less polluting. There has never been much more than about one household in 20 in Maine that uses propane as its primary heating fuel and now with natural gas lines fanning out across the state this number is declining rapidly as homeowners convert to this new fuel. This is certainly true in the Bangor-Brewer, Lewiston-Auburn, and greater Portland areas. Now natural gas lines are extending up into the Midcoast and just very recently my hometown of Searsport, of all places, learned that plans are afoot to bring natural gas directly here via the long-mothballed Searsport-to-Loring pipeline.
Actually looking forward to Searsport’s Eternal Flame!! Am hoping it will light the way to Tozier’s Grocery.
“Liberals are kicking and screaming for poverty and status quo in Mid Coast Town of Searsport!”